Professional Football Researchers Association Forum
PFRA is a nonprofit organization dedicated to the history of professional football. Formed in 1979, PFRA members include many of the game's foremost historians and writers.
NFL500 wrote:Here's the breakdown by division of which teams currently play their home games on natural grass:
AFC East: Miami
AFC North: Cleveland, Pittsburgh
AFC South: Jacksonville, Tennessee
AFC West: Denver, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego
NFC East: Philadelphia, Washington
NFC North: Chicago, Green Bay
NFC South: Carolina, Tampa
NFC West: Arizona, San Francisco
So 17 of the NFL's 31 stadiums presently have natural grass fields. Also, here's an except from the Ravens' website with comments from players explaining their support for putting in grass at M&T Bank Stadium next season.
Team President Dick Cass said M&T Bank Stadium has stacked up very well against other artificial surfaces when it comes to injuries, but there is data that shows there are fewer lower-body injuries when playing on a high-quality natural field compared to artificial.
Cornerback Lardarius Webb suffered both of his ACL tears while changing directions at M&T Bank Stadium.
“It’s a black and white difference,” Webb said, adding that he can feel a difference in his knees when he practices outside on the Ravens’ grass field compared to inside on the artificial turf at the Under Armour Performance Center.
“Turf is harder on your body, harder on your joints, harder on your muscles,” veteran defensive end Chris Canty said. “It’s a higher rate of injury.”
In addition to helping with lower-body injuries, tight end Crockett Gillmore said he expects it will help prevent concussions. He estimated that players get more concussions from their head slamming into the hard ground than they do from the actual hit.
“Last week, I hit my head pretty hard on the grass in Cleveland,” Gillmore said. “I actually saw my facemask print in the grass. If I hit my head that hard on turf, it would have been lights out for a couple days.”
1984-87 must have been the low point for the number grass fields. The Bears switched back to grass in 1988 and several other teams followed suit.
Weren't there some teams like the Patriots and Bengals who played on grass for awhile in the 1990s or early 2000s?
The Patriots switched back to artificial turf immediately after losing to the Jets in 2006 in the middle of the season.
oldecapecod11 wrote:The nfl cares not a fig about health and safety. The concern is simply image and presentation.
It does not want its product displayed as it sometimes was in days of yore.
I think the game pictured is the Giants-Cardinals 10-10 tie on 11-15-64 played in St. Louis at the old Busch Stadium/Sportsman's Park. That was the year the Giants fell to 2-10-2 after three straight Eastern Division titles. The Cardinals finished 9-3-2. Had they won, the Cardinals would have been tied with the Browns forcing a playoff game.
oldecapecod11 wrote:The nfl cares not a fig about health and safety. The concern is simply image and presentation.
It does not want its product displayed as it sometimes was in days of yore.
Had they won, the Cardinals would have been tied with the Browns forcing a playoff game.
If that playoff had taken place, it would have been in Cleveland, where the two teams had a wild game early in the year that saw the score change three times in the last two minutes: Trailing 30-26, the Browns converted on 4th and 19 and scored to take a 33-30 lead with just over a minute to go. The Cardinals then raced down to kick a tying field goal.